The Atheist Kurdish Girl. Helping to build a world free of superstitions.

About Me

Name: RoyaHome: sydney, AustraliaAbout Me: I went from looking for god to finding him evil to finding he does not exist, all before turning 14. Now, I can proudly say, I'm a libertarian, an anarchist, and a free thinker.See my complete profile

When I was studying for my Higher School Certificate, we were taught a Persian story about the Arab invasion to Persia, in our Persian studies. What was interesting about it was that I was reading for the first time about the Arab invasion of Persia from a Persian perspective. It was not just a factual account of what happened but a personal account of what happened. It was about a Persian princess being raped by an Arab Muslim.

What we studied in Iran was the exact opposite of this. We were taught through the eyes of Muslim Arab invaders. Our country history studies somehow stopped becoming a Persian study when our studies reached the era of Islamic Imperialism. All of a sudden we had moved from studying what was happening in Persia to what was happening in Arabia. We were taught that enlightened Muslims send a letter to the JAHIL Persian King to embrace the light of truth. We were not taught that Persia was invaded but that Muslims were fighting Jahils. You could even feel as if you were a Muslim Arab fighting the stupid Persian King.

This is very different to our study of Mongolian invasion of Persia where the history of Changiz Khan is ignored with the exception of a subjective note on the barbaric culture of Mongolians. I remember being confused as our history study seemed to give the perception that all of a sudden, some barbaric people (from out of space?) felt like killing some Persians. (note we were not taught about the killing of a Mongolian ambassador by Persia, which had a lot to do with the start of the invasion).

So when I was given this story about a Persian girl being raped by an Arab, I felt like I found a solution for fighting Islam in Iran. We needed to show Islam as an external factor and not internal. People have a problem with accepting that their culture is bad but if you show it has an external factor, that is it is not OUR culture but OTHERS, we have a hope fighting it.

This is why I think many Iranians are not identifying themselves as Muslims even if they are Muslims. The culture and history of Persia has always been important for Iranians, even after centuries of arabization, Iranians have still kept many of their culture intact. They see their identity mainly reflected in the history of Iran prior to Arab invasion rather than after the invasion even after all these efforts by our theocratic government to change this. In fact their efforts as I believe has had a backlash effect.

I never thought however, that this can also apply to Arabs but I was wrong. Arabs are not just Muslims. They have some beautiful history and culture no inferior to any other. Arabs were the one that translated the ancient Greek philosophy works. They had rules and customs that were not undermined even by the thieves. But this is never considered. This is NOT a fault of foreigners. It is Arabs themselves who want to undermine the history of Arabs before Islam. It may seem absurd but it is understandable as they see themselves as Muslims and Islam has made it clear that Arabs we uncivilized people before Islam. So if we are to ever fight Islam we really have to consider the Arab identity as the key to achieving that.

We are not racists but anti-Islam, however as long as Muslims define their identity solely on religion we are going to be seen as just racists.

This is a very interesting article by Ali Sina that made me think about this.

Thanks AJ, I'll try to see what I can. There were some refugees in Australia which were send back to middle east (mainly to Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan) and some were killed because of apostacy. I think it could be used as an evidence of the serious danger of being sent back, couldn't it?

Tariq Ali (who sometimes says very silly things, but didn't in this case) noted something very similar in a Clash of Fundamentalisms (his response to a Clash of Civilizations). He observed that the dominance of Islam in the Middle East (and elsewhere), in part, exists as a lack of options. After cycling through a seemingly endless list of failed western political systems including communism, capitalism, liberalism, democracy, socialism, secularism, imperialism (which of course isn't strictly western) and so on; Islam is not only all that's left, but the only specifically Middle Eastern political solution. In a lot of ways, Islam is the pan-Arab movement relieved of pesky western ideas.

I think the trick lay in the development of a new Arab idea - or one that's at least perceived that way in the Middle East. It's much easier to externalize an identity when it has a competitor.

bernarda, Khomeini actually wrote a book about the halal and haram sexual acts with animals and children as young as new borns.

Khomeini's book Tahrirolvasyleh:

-A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual act such as forplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed.

-A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on. However he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, however selling the meat to the next door village should be fine.

-If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned.

It is a shame that Iranians thought that he deserves to be the leader of a country once rules by Cyrus the Great.

Nope, I don't use that language. I am careful to make sure my point of view is not based on ethnic or religious foolishness but on logic and reason.

I will stop calling you a racist when you stop posting generalizations about ethnic groups.

You know, posts like "The Sick Arab Mentality".

You seem like a reasonable person but is obvious your upbriging has biased you in an unfortunate manner. The fact that you count BJ, a known racist bigot, amongst your friends is simply more proof of your primitive tribal mindset.

Cite a post where I generalzie about Jews or shut the fuck up you little piece of shit.

I use the term Zionazi for those who support a superior set of rights for Jews vis-a-vis non-Jews, just as small minded turds like you use the phrase Islamonazi and such. I have never said all Jews are Zionazis nor have I defamed the Jewish people as a group.

"When you defame Israel and Zionists you are defaming the overwhelming majority of Jew El Stupido." - its not my fault if the overwhelming majority of Jews support immoral racist dogma. Your argument is tantamount to saying that one cannot critize immoral actions if they are supported by the majority of the population which leads to a thesis that anti-semetism is totally legit if the majority of people support it.